1. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B received on April 12, 2012 from the Ulsan District Court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 10, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage agreement with Defendant B, the mortgagee B, the maximum debt amount of KRW 100 million, and the obligor C with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and signed the mortgage agreement with Defendant B (hereinafter “instant mortgage agreement”) on April 12, 2012 as the Disposition 1-A.

The registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage mentioned in paragraph (1) (hereinafter referred to as the “registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of this case”).

B. On April 11, 2014, the Defendant Kim Chang-gun seized the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security on the ground that Defendant B failed to pay local taxes, and subsequently, on April 14, 2014, the registration of the attachment of the instant right to collateral security was completed on the instant real estate.

C. On April 8, 2016, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation of Busan Savings Bank (hereinafter “Defendant Deposit Insurance Corporation”) attached the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security on a provisional attachment order of Busan District Court 2016Kadan50977 on April 8, 2016, and subsequently on April 11, 2016, the provisional attachment registration of the instant real estate was completed.

[Ground of Recognition] Defendant Pyeongtaek-gun, Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation: The absence of dispute, entry of the evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings, Defendant B: Judgment of deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. The plaintiff asserted that there was no legal act establishing the secured claim at the time of the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case, and the defendant B led to confession. Thus, the secured claim of this case is null and void due to the absence of the secured claim.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case to the Plaintiff.

3. Claim against the defendant Pyeongtaek-gun and the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation;

A. The judgment on the cause of the claim is a mortgage created by setting only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured and reserving the determination of the debt in the future (Article 357(1) of the Civil Act), which is a continued mortgage.